Julian Assange: rapist or not?

[nathan]

Sure, but they say they only want him to answer questions for now.

Why do you keep making this false claim?

Under Swedish law, JA has the right to make a case before a decision to prosecute. He could chose to say nothing at that point. Whether he says anything or not, he would have another chance to defend himself in court, should prosecution proceed.

As it stands now, there's sufficient evidence to prosecute. Extradition would not have been granted otherwise.

This has been pointed out several times here.

 

[nathan]

The outcome of the interview determines if he is to be arrested or not. It's a legal formality in the Swedish judiciary system. It needs to take place on Swedish soil.

Perhaps, if that procedure's not followed, the accused would have an additional defence of claiming undue process or something like that.

 

[BenBurch]

Perhaps, if that procedure's not followed, the accused would have an additional defence of claiming undue process or something like that.

That was my understanding from a Swedish legal expert interviewed by BBC about a year ago.

 

[uke2se]

That was my understanding from a Swedish legal expert interviewed by BBC about a year ago.

Assange is basically trying to game the Swedish judiciary system, and playing all of his supporters for deluded ideological fools.

 

[Silhouette]

To those of you who have patiently and sometimes impatiently explained the Swedish legal system, I just want to say thanks! It makes me feel less ignorant about the issue and I've got a clearer picture of what's going on.

 

[Here_to_learn]

Inconvenient material like this (21 August 2010)?:

The arrest warrant is withdrawn. "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape," says one of Stockholm's chief prosecutors, Eva Finne.

Yes, I can image that you find it inconvenient, or even embarrassing to bring up stuff that has been explained earlier in the thread, but since some additional facts became available only the other day I thought I should add that to the thread.

First, the facts. The duty prosecutor decided to open the case for investigation (Aug 20th), it was then reassigned (Aug 21th) and the second prosecutor decided to terminate the investigation (Aug 25th). On request from the two women, their legal counsel appealed that to the prosecution authority (Aug 27th), and the case was routed to the Development Center Gothenburg, as all cases related to sexual crimes should be according to procedure. It was there reviewed by the Director of Public Prosecution at that center (Ms Ny), and she decided to reopen the case. (Sep 1st).

If you search back in the thread, you can find information where I was in communication with the Prosecution authority regarding how the procedure works.

The additional information that became available is some statistics.

During 2010, a total of 2300 appeals to reopen an investigation was received by the Prosecution authority, and routed to one of the development centers (according to the type of crime). On average 11% of them resulted in the investigation being reopened.

Out of those 2300, 164 were related to sexual crimes against persons 15 years old or older and they ended up at the Development Center Gothenburg. Again about 11% of these resulted in the investigation being reopened.

(So that should probably be 18 cases, the JA case being one of them - my comment).

And of course, after this two Swedish courts have reviewed the evidence and agreed with the prosecutor.

So one prosecutor said no, two prosecutors and two courts said yes to continue the investigation.

 

[JihadJane]

And a blatantly lying one, claiming

Well, if you actually read the Expressen article (Swedish, translated by google and me for your pleasure), you would know that's a blatant lie. Both women have accused him of un-consensual sex, also known as rape and molestation. No leftist blog can change that.

http://www.expressen.se/nyheter/kvi...nte-iscensatta-av-pentagon-eller-nagon-annan/

Why do you think a sensationalist, right-wing tabloid would be more reliable that a serious "leftist blog"?

Swedish minor rape and molestation are not synonymous with Swedish major rape, rape as it is usually understood, as you presumably know. You are being dishonest conflating them. In both cases with Assange, IIRC, consensual sex reportedly followed and preceded the alleged offenses.

The report in Aftonbladet that the Expressen references is very confused and short on detail. The statements it claims the women made contradict the statements the women had already made when they went to the police to enquire about forcing Assange to have an STD test. The police report was leaked after Aftonbladet article was published, so the information in it would have been unknown to the writer of the Expressen article, Marit Sundberg.

 

[JihadJane]

Yes, I can image that you find it inconvenient, or even embarrassing to bring up stuff that has been explained earlier in the thread, but since some additional facts became available only the other day I thought I should add that to the thread.

First, the facts. The duty prosecutor decided to open the case for investigation (Aug 20th), it was then reassigned (Aug 21th) and the second prosecutor decided to terminate the investigation (Aug 25th). On request from the two women, their legal counsel appealed that to the prosecution authority (Aug 27th), and the case was routed to the Development Center Gothenburg, as all cases related to sexual crimes should be according to procedure. It was there reviewed by the Director of Public Prosecution at that center (Ms Ny), and she decided to reopen the case. (Sep 1st).

If you search back in the thread, you can find information where I was in communication with the Prosecution authority regarding how the procedure works.

The additional information that became available is some statistics.

During 2010, a total of 2300 appeals to reopen an investigation was received by the Prosecution authority, and routed to one of the development centers (according to the type of crime). On average 11% of them resulted in the investigation being reopened.

Out of those 2300, 164 were related to sexual crimes against persons 15 years old or older and they ended up at the Development Center Gothenburg. Again about 11% of these resulted in the investigation being reopened.

(So that should probably be 18 cases, the JA case being one of them - my comment).

And of course, after this two Swedish courts have reviewed the evidence and agreed with the prosecutor.

So one prosecutor said no, two prosecutors and two courts said yes to continue the investigation.

I didn't mean that inconvenient in that way.

I quoted that statement as a response to those who derisively ridicule those who question whether Assange's sexual behavior constituted criminal rape. If one of Stockholm's chief prosecutors can see no reason to suspect that a rape was committed then it is unreasonable to call loony tunes** on others who agree with him.

**"Fantasists pre-select conclusions and simply select 'evidence' which supports them. Any inconvenient material which challenges, or in any way calls into question, the fantasy must be rejected. I don't see how the opinions of fantasists can have any real value, since they're based on wishful thinking rather than honest investigation.

Racists, truthers, holocaust deniers, personality cultists, "anti-imperialist" ideologues; all grow off the same tree."

 

[JihadJane]

A long, rich article by Glenn Greenwald, well worth reading, looking at Assange contemptfest in the media; at what's actually preventing him from going to Sweden and facing the allegations laid against him and some interesting points, among others, on what lies behind Ecuador's decision to grant asylum and on Sweden's and the UK's refusal to discuss any agreement that could safeguard both the rights of the complainants and Assange's rights not to be imprisoned for basic journalism:


'The bizarre, unhealthy, blinding media contempt for Julian Assange
It is possible to protect the rights of the complainants in Sweden and Assange's rights against political persecution, but a vindictive thirst for vengeance is preventing that'

...let us pause to reflect on a truly amazing and revealing fact, one that calls for formal study in several academic fields of discipline. Is it not remarkable that one of the very few individuals over the past decade to risk his welfare, liberty and even life to meaningfully challenge the secrecy regime on which the American national security state (and those of its obedient allies) depends just so happens to have become – long before he sought asylum from Ecuador – the most intensely and personally despised figure among the American and British media class and the British "liberal" intelligentsia?

...

There are several obvious reasons why Assange provokes such unhinged media contempt. The most obvious among them is competition: the resentment generated by watching someone outside their profession generate more critical scoops in a year than all other media outlets combined (see this brilliant 2008 post, in the context of the Clintons, about how professional and ego-based competition produces personal hatred like nothing else can).

Other causes are more subtle though substantive. Many journalists (and liberals) like to wear the costume of outsider-insurgent, but are, at their core, devoted institutionalists, faithful believers in the goodness of their society's power centers, and thus resent those (like Assange) who actually and deliberately place themselves outside of it. By putting his own liberty and security at risk to oppose the world's most powerful factions, Assange has clearly demonstrated what happens to real adversarial dissidents and insurgents – they're persecuted, demonized, and threatened, not befriended by and invited to parties within the halls of imperial power – and he thus causes many journalists to stand revealed as posers, servants to power, and courtiers.

Then there's the ideological cause. As one long-time British journalist told me this week when discussing the vitriol of the British press toward Assange: "Nothing delights British former lefties more than an opportunity to defend power while pretending it is a brave stance in defence of a left liberal principle." That's the warped mindset that led to so many of these self-styled liberal journalists to support the attack on Iraq and other acts of Western aggression in the name of liberal values. And it's why nothing triggers their rage like fundamental critiques of, and especially meaningful opposition to, the institutions of power to which they are unfailingly loyal.

Of course, such "unhinged contempt" for Assange (and not a few others!) is much in evidence here on JREF too. Perhaps posters who feel intense contempt for Assange could offer an analysis of their feelings.

 

[theprestige]

A long, rich article by Glenn Greenwald, well worth reading, looking at Assange contemptfest in the media; at what's actually preventing him from going to Sweden and facing the allegations laid against him and some interesting points, among others, on what lies behind Ecuador's decision to grant asylum and on Sweden's and the UK's refusal to discuss any agreement that could safeguard both the rights of the complainants and Assange's rights not to be imprisoned for basic journalism:


'The bizarre, unhealthy, blinding media contempt for Julian Assange
It is possible to protect the rights of the complainants in Sweden and Assange's rights against political persecution, but a vindictive thirst for vengeance is preventing that'

That article seems to consist almost entirely of bare assertion, speculation, and hearsay.

Amusingly, one of the few facts it does contain is the US Army's documented proposal for how to destroy Wikileak's credibility: identify and arrest the leakers.

You say the US might be plotting to destroy Assange's credibility? You're right, and we have the documentation to prove it. The US plan to smear Assange is this: Arrest Bradley Manning. America is well into "mission accomplished" territory at this point. Rape charges in Sweden? That's all Assange.

Thanks, Glenn Greenwald, for clearing that up.

Also who cares why they British press (allegedly) loathes Assange? Is it really important that he's apparently a kind of Renaissance Douchebag, with a different flavor of douchebaggery for different milieus? To governments, he's an operational risk. To lovers, he's a creepy molester. And, according to Greenwald, to journalists, he's unlicensed competition or something. I imagine that to whales, he's some kind of annoying krill that gets stuck in their baleen and won't wash out.

 

[uke2se]

Why do you think a sensationalist, right-wing tabloid would be more reliable that a serious "leftist blog"?

Aha... hahaha... hahaAhahahHAHAHAHHA

I... I just...

Swedish minor rape and molestation are not synonymous with Swedish major rape, rape as it is usually understood, as you presumably know. You are being dishonest conflating them. In both cases with Assange, IIRC, consensual sex reportedly followed and preceded the alleged offenses.

Stop lying. Rape is rape.

The report in Aftonbladet that the Expressen references is very confused and short on detail.

Too bad for you that there are people here that actually read Swedish.

The statements it claims the women made contradict the statements the women had already made when they went to the police to enquire about forcing Assange to have an STD test.

Nope it doesn't. The statements match the statements reported on. Sorry, Jane.

The police report was leaked after Aftonbladet article was published, so the information in it would have been unknown to the writer of the Expressen article, Marit Sundberg.

Except for the fact that the article is an interview with one of the women. I don't think there's a facepalm big enough for this.

Jebus tapdancing Christ, Jane, you are really grasping at straws now. I mean, when you have to rely on nobody understanding the language of your sources, you're really hung out to dry when there are people that do.

 

[uke2se]

delete

 

[JihadJane]

Who is Claes Borgström?

We at Aftonbladet have for some time been in possession of articles that cast doubt on the claim Thomas Quick is a serial killer. Something that should also be called into question is the influence of Quick's solicitor Claes Borgström in getting his mentally ill client convicted of multiple murders without a shred of evidence.

...

Claes Borgström dropped out of the case when he was appointed equality ombudsman. Quick announced in an op-ed in DN.se that he didn't want to help solve any more murders. With the help of Claes Borgström, a psychically [i.e.mentally -JJ] ill individual has been convicted of eight murders with no evidence whatsoever and been branded as one of Sweden's worst criminals ever. And of course if he's innocent then the real murderers are still on the loose and nobody's looking for them.

http://rixstep.com/2/1/20101122,02.shtml

 

[BenBurch]

That article seems to consist almost entirely of bare assertion, speculation, and hearsay.

Amusingly, one of the few facts it does contain is the US Army's documented proposal for how to destroy Wikileak's credibility: identify and arrest the leakers.

You say the US might be plotting to destroy Assange's credibility? You're right, and we have the documentation to prove it. The US plan to smear Assange is this: Arrest Bradley Manning. America is well into "mission accomplished" territory at this point. Rape charges in Sweden? That's all Assange.

Thanks, Glenn Greenwald, for clearing that up.

Also who cares why they British press (allegedly) loathes Assange? Is it really important that he's apparently a kind of Renaissance Douchebag, with a different flavor of douchebaggery for different milieus? To governments, he's an operational risk. To lovers, he's a creepy molester. And, according to Greenwald, to journalists, he's unlicensed competition or something. I imagine that to whales, he's some kind of annoying krill that gets stuck in their baleen and won't wash out.

^5

 

[uke2se]

Who is Claes Borgström?



http://rixstep.com/2/1/20101122,02.shtml

Claes Borgström is the solicitor representing the two women. He earlier represented Thomas Quick, a person who has admitted to killing a bunch of people. Thomas Quick has subsequently withdrawn several of his confessions.

I'm not sure what kind of picture you're trying to paint here, Jane, but Borgström was only defending Quick. The allegations of misconduct are directed against the prosecutor for supposedly coaching Quick's confessions, so... fail.

 

[uke2se]

I must say I find it amusing that JihadJane keeps trying to paint some sort of picture of judiciary misconduct on the part of the women, their lawyer, the prosecution or whomever she think she can get away with. It is amusing because judiciary misconduct is exactly what she wants to happen in the Assange case.

 

[JihadJane]

That article seems to consist almost entirely of bare assertion, speculation, and hearsay.

Amusingly, one of the few facts it does contain is the US Army's documented proposal for how to destroy Wikileak's credibility: identify and arrest the leakers.

You say the US might be plotting to destroy Assange's credibility? You're right, and we have the documentation to prove it. The US plan to smear Assange is this: Arrest Bradley Manning. America is well into "mission accomplished" territory at this point. Rape charges in Sweden? That's all Assange.

Thanks, Glenn Greenwald, for clearing that up.

Also who cares why they British press (allegedly) loathes Assange? Is it really important that he's apparently a kind of Renaissance Douchebag, with a different flavor of douchebaggery for different milieus? To governments, he's an operational risk. To lovers, he's a creepy molester. And, according to Greenwald, to journalists, he's unlicensed competition or something. I imagine that to whales, he's some kind of annoying krill that gets stuck in their baleen and won't wash out.

Renaissance? What have you got against that?

 

[theprestige]

Renaissance? What have you got against that?

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/263895036c2255ed3f.jpg[/qimg]

Enh. I prefer Bernini's David:

[qimg]http://www.students.sbc.edu/vermilya08/Bernini/Witcome%20David.jpg[/qimg]

Anyway "renaissance douchebag" is a play on "renaissance man", which is a figure of speech indicating that the subject has a diverse array of skills and talents. It's based on the trope that many great figures of the Renaissance were masters of many different disciplines--great artists, great mathemeticians, etc.

Obviously a "renaissance douchebag" is someone who brings to the table not just one form of douchery, but several.

 

[JihadJane]

Oh.

 

[BenBurch]

... It's based on the trope that many great figures of the Renaissance were masters of many different disciplines--great artists, great mathemeticians, etc.

...

I think that was about the last time in history in which one man could know all that was thought worth knowing at the time.